Garko to play left??

I'm not sure if anyone else has seen this, but Castro writes here about the Indians experimenting with Garko in LF. Does anyone else view this as a colossal waste of time, or simply hilarious?

11 months ago Chief Wahoo 52 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yes.

I refuse to ever root for a team that routinely does the MVP chant for opposing players.

by TheVanillaGorilla on Feb 17, 2009 2:13 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Good answer.

-Erik

by drerikbrady on Feb 17, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It’s a waste of time only if you believe that giving Garko time to work on his LF defense is hurting other parts of his or other players’ games. If you don’t believe that — and I don’t — then it’s not a waste of time at all. It’s about finding out if Garko is versatile enough to play some games out there.

I realize you think the result is predictable — he can’t handle OF defense — but I don’t mind giving it a look.

by tabler84 on Feb 17, 2009 2:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I actually find it disturbing. Moving Garko to the OF makes no sense, which suggests they are only trying him out there out of desperation. I would rather the team not be desperate.

by APV on Feb 17, 2009 2:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

This is along the lines of what I was thinking

by Chief Wahoo on Feb 17, 2009 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me more like they’re trying to give him a chance to be worth something, or at very least increase his trade value.

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Feb 17, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seeing Garko in the outfield might actually lower his trade value.

by Jay on Feb 17, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I don’t disagree. I’m just trying to come up with some justification for this.

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Feb 17, 2009 9:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Considering his offensive limitations, the best way to increase his trade value is to move him back to backstop. He’s not good enough to play first, so why would be enough of a hitter to play left?

by odradek on Feb 18, 2009 12:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is actually being done as a competitive reality show for STO being hosted by Candy Maldonado and Wesley Snipes (in character as Willy Mays Hayes).

You know Selig? Ombudsman.

by rolub on Feb 17, 2009 2:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don’t really have a problem with it (Ben Broussard, anyone?), but I don’t understand why he isn’t trying RF instead? You would think the transition from 1B>RF would be easier than 1B>LF. At least, that seems logical to me.

by Toxicadam on Feb 17, 2009 2:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Isn’t RF a more difficult adjustment for any fielder? It’s generally a hard position to field and you need a stronger arm. The adjustment to LF seems logical to me (if you’re even going to try him out there). The odd thing about this move is that these type of adjustments are made to improve the team’s flexibility (allowing Wedge to have more permutations of different starting lineups, perhaps to adjust for platoons) or to keep a bat in the lineup. Why are we worried about keeping Garko’s bat in the lineup at this point?

"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter

by Denver Tribe Fan on Feb 17, 2009 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why are we worried about keeping Garko’s bat in the lineup at this point?

That’s the question that really needs to be asked here. As bad as Garko looked, he was en fuego compared to Looch. In case of epic fail by Francisco, they can put Garko out there and keep DeRosa at third, while having have more time to give LaPorta and Brantley seasoning in Columbus without having to put Carroll at third for an extended stay It also gives them the ability to give Victor more time at first and Shoppach at catcher while DHing Pronk.

Yeah – it’s about flexibility, but it’s more about having a backup plan in case of serious regression and epic fail. Last year, it seemed clear that there was not much of a backup plan in place. This year it seems that management is trying to hedge all possible bets.

Pronk Needs You

by woodsmeister on Feb 17, 2009 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Last year, there were many backup plans in place, but management was extremely slow to get serious about using them. They kept Hafner and Martinez in there far too long. They fiddled around with Tyner and Aubrey, kept Marte and Shoppach playing dominoes, and took far too long to turn the AB over to Choo and Francisco.

There is a table in the book that shows the Top 10 AL hitters from June 1 to the end of the year. The point of the table is that Choo and Shoppach are both on it. But something else you can see from that table is that even from June 1 on, those two guys didn’t get as much playing time as other AL starters, they have 80-100 fewer at-bats.

by Jay on Feb 17, 2009 7:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Even in September, Choo was sitting against lefty starters. I had a friend who had him on his fantasy team, and I could point to every game a week ahead of time that Choo wouldn’t be playing in

by Roger Dorn on Feb 17, 2009 7:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

By my count, Choo got 4 starts against lefties in September. He sat twice against lefties, Liriano and Danks.

by ClarkM on Feb 17, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Haha, thanks for the official. I was pretty busy in Sep, so was going purely off what I remember watching

by Roger Dorn on Feb 17, 2009 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn’t mean this to come across snarky. I was curious and looked it up and thought I’d share.

by ClarkM on Feb 17, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn’t take it that way. I think it’s good to call me out though because I rely mostly on memory unless I am in a back and forth argument

by Roger Dorn on Feb 17, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

God, I’d forgotten that Jason Tyner actually got a start for us last year. Ugh.

DISCLAIMER: I may be bitter.

by zempf on Feb 18, 2009 8:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hate to trot out the last-12-games thing again, but I will anyway. Garko’s OPS was slightly worse than Dellucci’s through mid-September, after which Garko padded his stats significantly by feasting on a succession of talentless and worn-out pitchers. Dellucci got a lot less playing time at that point and, it should be noted, was terrible, but for most of the season, Dellucci was out-hitting Garko a bit.

Ideally, Garko and Dellucci would platoon in what I call the “tenth hitter” role. That is, if one of the good position players dies right before the game when it’s too late to make a roster move, the tenth hitter is the guy you send in there. Also gets sent in as a pinch-hitter when you’re not really trying to win the game as much as frustrate and demoralize the hitter you’re removing, but once Marte is off the roster, there may not be as much call for that role.

by Jay on Feb 17, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs

That second paragraph is just harsh.

by Chief Wahoo on Feb 17, 2009 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Niiiice

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Feb 17, 2009 9:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Athankyaveramuch.

Certainly wasn’t expecting that to go green, but I guess the people love red meat. And snark.

by Jay on Feb 18, 2009 1:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by FredOx on Feb 18, 2009 9:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m confused. Are you trying to tell me that David Dellucci would be a better hitter than DeRo if DeRo died an hour before the game???? I’m not so sure about that. Looch would still be a worse OF as well, at least until rigor mortis really set in…

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Feb 18, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

As bad as Garko looked, he was en fuego compared to Looch.

This is in the dictionary under the entry, “damning with faint praise.”

"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter

by Denver Tribe Fan on Feb 17, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Because Garko isn’t as horrible/low ceiling as people on LGT make him out to be. I know I’ll catch flack for that comment. I see no reason why Garko can’t rebound to his 2007 levels.

by world dictator on Feb 18, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

At this point we’ve made a joke out of it, but the core assessment is correct. His ceiling is something around 900 OPS with no defensive or baserunning value to speak of, and with a 750 OPS, that’s horrible.

by Jay on Feb 18, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But, Jay, he can shotgun two beers at once. Can your statistics do that?!?

by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 19, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think they’re trying Garko in left because it’s basically inconceivable that we would want Garko in RF, while someone else (Choo, Francisco, The Reflex) plays LF. I would imagine that Garko has enough arm for RF, though. As a former catcher known for his lack of athleticism, arm strength probably is the least of his potential issues as an outfielder.

by Jay on Feb 17, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow – failed revisions galore. Let’s try it again:

That’s the question that really needs to be asked here. As bad as Garko looked, he was en fuego compared to Looch. In case of epic fail by Francisco, they can put Garko out there and keep DeRosa at third, while having more time to give LaPorta and Brantley seasoning in Columbus without having to put Carroll at third for an extended stay.

It also gives them the ability to give Victor more time at first and Shoppach at catcher while DHing Pronk.

While you would think that Garko’s presumed arm (he is a former catcher) would make him a right fielder, it’s important to remember that there is much less room to cover in left at Progressive Field.

Pronk Needs You

by woodsmeister on Feb 17, 2009 3:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

All I know is an outfield consisting of Garko in left, Barfield in center, and Carroll in right would be downright entertaining…As long as it’s only during ST.

by Chief Wahoo on Feb 17, 2009 3:53 PM EST reply actions 2 recs

It might also be an amusing lineup to see the day after the Tribe clinches home field for the playoffs.

by still ill on Feb 17, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs

but only if this is done so that our opponent would clinch the wild card as a result of beating us, and thus making the Yankees miss the playoffs yet again.

by lenred on Feb 17, 2009 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

You think Dellucci will still be with us in July, though?

DISCLAIMER: I may be bitter.

by zempf on Feb 18, 2009 9:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I actually don’t mind this at all. For his career, Garko has a .894 OPS against lefties. If he is able to play left, which I am skeptical of, it would allow us to have Hafner at DH, Shop at C, Vic at first, and Francisco in right.

I’m not convince of Choo’s ability to hit lefties. He never hit them in the minors and in his major league career has a .703 OPS against lefties in 116 PA.

by ClarkM on Feb 17, 2009 4:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The father of a guy I know says Garko seems slimmer.

Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.

by westbrook on Feb 17, 2009 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think I’m supposed to respond to this, but I’m not sure what it means.

by supermarioelia on Feb 17, 2009 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ah never mind, you were talking about an actual father, not Andy Marte’s father.

by supermarioelia on Feb 17, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe he’s slimmer from all the running around in the outfield.

by SanD on Feb 17, 2009 9:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

.703? That’s horrid, compared to Grady’s .720.

by FredOx on Feb 17, 2009 8:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not sure what you are trying to say. I’m all for giving Choo at bats against lefties this season, but I don’t think its a bad idea to have a backup plan in case he proves to be ineffective. The .703 might be on the high side of his actual ability, it’s a very small sample.

by ClarkM on Feb 17, 2009 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This strikes me as one of those deals where it happens probably no more than 3 times in the season.

Scenario where we’re the home team, down a couple runs or a run in the 9th with a lefty on the mound like Fuentes or Sherill and you at least go all in with him being the best bat available in a PH situation. Maybe he pops one or ties it with a double. Where worst case, the game ends up tied and you have to live with him in LF.

Kind of like that time in 2007 when Wedge went all in and pinch hit Shoppach with Vic already in the game and we would have lost the DH with Hafner if memory serves. And Shoppach hit it out.

by cheech99 on Feb 17, 2009 6:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

next thing you’re going to tell me is that barfield might see some time at third base.

by Brick. on Feb 17, 2009 6:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Barfield might see some time at third base.

by Chief Wahoo on Feb 17, 2009 9:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But don’t worry, he won’t see any time a short!

by Chief Wahoo on Feb 17, 2009 9:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is one of those ideas that seems idiotic even in foresight.

by Ryan on Feb 17, 2009 10:36 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I’m prone to fall in love with just about any idea out of the so crazy it just might work department (short of the four man rotation), but I don’t like this idea either.

by jhon on Feb 17, 2009 11:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs